[Bug 650643] Review Request: cegui06 - CEGUI library 0.6 for apps which need this specific version
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650643
--- Comment #9 from Hans de Goede 2010-11-09 03:31:01 EST
---
(In reply to comment #8)
> The current macro %{version} would expand to 0.6.2. The current URL
> in the comments is inaccurate which would expand to
> http://downloads.sourceforge.net/crayzedsgui/CEGUI-0.6.2.tar.gz. This points
> to
> a non-existent resource
Ah I see, yes that is a problem. The cegui06 package is based on the F-14 cegui
package and I took the tarbal and Source0 comment from there. It seems that
since that rpm was made, upstream did a small bugfix release named 0.6.2b,
and *removed* the old tarbal, bad upstream!
Anyways I've redone the package using the new 0.6.2b tarbal (which only
contains fixes to the lua plugin which does not get build) as a base and
completely spelling out the removal of the GLEW directory (really how hard is
it to read?).
Sorry if I sound a bit grumpy, I admit the url to the original tarbal has gone
404, but really how hard is it to understand:
"with the bundled GLEW: RendererModules/OpenGLGUIRenderer/GLEW removed" ?
Anyways here is a new version based on the new 0.6.2b tarbal:
Spec URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~jwrdegoede/cegui06.spec
SRPM URL:
http://people.fedoraproject.org/~jwrdegoede/cegui06-0.6.2-2.fc14.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 643392] Review Request: pyqtrailer - PyQt4 application to download trailers from apple.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=643392 Stanislav Ochotnicky changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-11-09 03:44:06 --- Comment #7 from Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-11-09 03:44:06 EST --- I was waiting for the pytrailer dependency to get into f13-14 through bodhi. Now everything is build, updates pending. Thanks for review and SCM. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648267] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity - Make tamper-resistant links in CGI::Application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648267
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar 2010-11-09 03:45:41 EST ---
Spec file changes:
--- perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity.spec 2010-10-31
19:04:21.0 +0100
+++ perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity.spec.1 2010-11-08
21:21:51.0 +0100
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity
Version:0.06
-Release:1%{?dist}
+Release:2%{?dist}
Summary:Make tamper-resistant links in CGI::Application
License:GPL+ or Artistic
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -11,9 +11,11 @@
BuildRequires: perl(CGI)
BuildRequires: perl(CGI::Application)
BuildRequires: perl(Digest::HMAC)
+BuildRequires: perl(Digest::MD5)
BuildRequires: perl(Module::Build)
BuildRequires: perl(Test::More)
BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) >= 1.04
BuildRequires: perl(URI)
BuildRequires: perl(URI::Escape)
BuildRequires: perl(URI::QueryParam)
@@ -53,5 +55,8 @@
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
+* Mon Nov 08 2010 Emmanuel Seyman - 0.06-2
+- Fix spec file per review
+
* Sun Oct 31 2010 Emmanuel Seyman 0.06-1
- Specfile autogenerated by cpanspec 1.78.
> > FIX: Add perl(Digest::MD5) BuildRequires as the module can dual-live in the
> > future (http://search.cpan.org/~gaas/Digest-MD5/).
> +BuildRequires: perl(Digest::MD5)
Ok.
> > > t/pod-coverage.t .. skipped: Test::Pod::Coverage 1.04
> > > required for testing POD coverage
> > FIX: Add perl(Test::Pod::Coverage ) >= 1.04 to BuildRequires.
> +BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) >= 1.04
Ok.
Package builds in F15
(http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2589305). Ok.
Resolution: Package APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649777] Review Request: jorbis - Pure Java Ogg Vorbis Decoder
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649777 --- Comment #5 from Hans de Goede 2010-11-09 04:07:00 EST --- Hi, (In reply to comment #3) > Hi, > Here is the last version of the jorbis specfile before it was retired from > Fedora. You might find it useful. It's only retired a couple months ago, so > the > old specfile should be still in good shape. > > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=jorbis.git;a=blob;f=jorbis.spec;h=ae378a9a195bc885e3f9aa0a56b2068a11e840f9;hb=79aa3902b3c6166ae9b4c95250e772569207e0e2 > > I think we should match the name of the player subpackage to the old one, or > at > least add some Provides. > > Also, we probably need to have a higher VR than 0.0.17-3 to provide a healthy > upgrade path. > > There used to be a "comment" subpackage. If you don't want to package that > part, it would be good to Obsolete it. Thanks! I've fixed the upgrade path issues (renamed player package to -player, Obsolete -comment package, make sure the VR is higher) here is a new version: Spec URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~jwrdegoede/jorbis.spec SRPM URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~jwrdegoede/jorbis-0.0.17-4.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 625603] Review Request: libaacs - Open implementation of AACS specification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=625603 Bug 625603 depends on bug 625602, which changed state. Bug 625602 Summary: Review Request:libbluray - Library to access Blu-Ray disks for video playback https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=625602 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 625602] Review Request:libbluray - Library to access Blu-Ray disks for video playback
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=625602 Xavier Bachelot changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Flag|needinfo?(xav...@bachelot.o | |rg) | Last Closed||2010-11-09 04:21:26 --- Comment #16 from Xavier Bachelot 2010-11-09 04:21:26 EST --- An update with the latest snapshot is on its way to rawhide, F14 and F13. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2589368 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2589390 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2589394 Time to close this bug now. Thanks again for the review, hopefully you or someone else find a bit of time for the sister review in that other famous repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648266] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON - Easy manipulation of JSON headers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648266
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar 2010-11-09 04:37:51 EST ---
Spec file changes:
--- perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON.spec 2010-10-31 19:44:05.0 +0100
+++ perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON.spec.1 2010-11-08 21:22:22.0 +0100
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON
Version:1.02
-Release:1%{?dist}
+Release:2%{?dist}
Summary:Easy manipulation of JSON headers
License:GPL+ or Artistic
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -8,12 +8,13 @@
Source0:
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/W/WO/WONKO/CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON-%{version}.tar.gz
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
BuildArch: noarch
-BuildRequires: perl(CGI::Application)
-BuildRequires: perl(JSON)
-BuildRequires: perl(JSON::Any)
+BuildRequires: perl(CGI::Application) >= 4
+BuildRequires: perl(JSON) >= 2.02
+BuildRequires: perl(JSON::Any) >= 1.14
BuildRequires: perl(Module::Build)
BuildRequires: perl(Test::More)
BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod::Coverage)
Requires: perl(CGI::Application)
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`%{__perl} -V:version`"; echo
$version))
@@ -46,10 +47,13 @@
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
-%doc Changes README TODO
+%doc Changes README
%{perl_vendorlib}/*
%{_mandir}/man3/*
%changelog
+* Mon Nov 08 2010 Emmanuel Seyman - 1.02-2
+- Fix spec file per review
+
* Mon Oct 04 2010 Emmanuel Seyman 1.02-1
- Specfile autogenerated by cpanspec 1.78.
> > > BuildRequires: perl(CGI::Application)
> > FIX: Add `>= 4' version constrain to the BuildRequires (META.yml)
> +BuildRequires: perl(CGI::Application) >= 4
Ok.
> > > BuildRequires: perl(JSON)
> > FIX: Add `>= 2.02' version constrain to the BuildRequires (META.yml)
> +BuildRequires: perl(JSON) >= 2.02
Ok.
> > > BuildRequires: perl(JSON::Any)
> > FIX: Add `>= 1.14' version constrain to the BuildRequires (META.yml)
> +BuildRequires: perl(JSON::Any) >= 1.14
Ok.
> > FIX: Do not pack empty TODO file.
> -%doc Changes README TODO
> +%doc Changes README
$ rpm -pq -lv
../RPMS/noarch/perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON-1.02-2.fc13.noarch.rpm
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 lis 9 10:28
/usr/share/doc/perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON-1.02
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 789 dub 8 2009
/usr/share/doc/perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON-1.02/Changes
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 4459 dub 8 2009
/usr/share/doc/perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON-1.02/README
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 3414 lis 9 10:28
/usr/share/man/man3/CGI::Application::Plugin::JSON.3pm.gz
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 lis 9 10:28
/usr/share/perl5/CGI
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 lis 9 10:28
/usr/share/perl5/CGI/Application
drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 lis 9 10:28
/usr/share/perl5/CGI/Application/Plugin
-rw-r--r--1 rootroot 7192 lis 9 10:28
/usr/share/perl5/CGI/Application/Plugin/JSON.pm
Ok.
> FIX: Add version to Requires: perl(CGI::Application) and perl(JSON::Any) as
> stated in META.yml.
All supported Fedoras fulfill minimal versions. Ok.
> > FIX: BuildRequire perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) >= 1.04
> +BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod::Coverage)
All supported Fedoras fulfill minimal versions. Ok.
All tests pass. Ok.
Package builds in F15
(http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2589434). Ok.
Resolution: Package APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648266] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON - Easy manipulation of JSON headers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648266 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Emmanuel Seyman 2010-11-09 04:44:08 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > > Resolution: Package APPROVED. Thanks, Petr. Requesting SCM New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON Short Description: Easy manipulation of JSON headers Owners: eseyman Branches: f14 f13 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648267] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity - Make tamper-resistant links in CGI::Application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648267 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Emmanuel Seyman 2010-11-09 04:45:40 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > > Resolution: Package APPROVED. Thanks for the review. Requesting SCM New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity Short Description: Make tamper-resistant links in CGI::Application Owners: eseyman Branches: f14 f13 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 543154] Review Request: mingw32-SDL_mixer - Simple DirectMedia Layer's Sample Mixer Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543154 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 05:26:33 EST --- mingw32-SDL_image-1.2.10-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-SDL_image-1.2.10-1.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 543154] Review Request: mingw32-SDL_mixer - Simple DirectMedia Layer's Sample Mixer Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543154 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 588433] Review Request: rubygem-echoe - ruby gem pacaking tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588433 Michal Fojtik changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(mfoj...@redhat.co | |m) | --- Comment #15 from Michal Fojtik 2010-11-09 05:26:08 EST --- Sorry for late reply, here are updated files: * Tue Nov 09 2010 Michal Fojtik 4.3.1-2 - Removed vendorized rake from echoe.rb - Removed unused site_lib macro 4.3.1-2 = Spec URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-echoe.spec SRPM URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-echoe-4.3.1-2.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 543147] Review Request: mingw32-SDL_image - MinGW Windows port of the Image loading library for SDL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543147 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 05:38:20 EST --- mingw32-SDL_image-1.2.10-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-SDL_image-1.2.10-1.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 543147] Review Request: mingw32-SDL_image - MinGW Windows port of the Image loading library for SDL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543147 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 641271] Review Request: openerp-client - Open Source ERP Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641271 --- Comment #8 from Andrea V. 2010-11-09 05:46:37 EST --- After some investigation I found a guy that helped me on this problem... http://code.google.com/p/spiff-gtkwidgets/issues/detail?id=9 so at the moment we have to wait if something will change... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 644708] Review Request: pymongo - Python driver for MongoDB
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644708 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 05:48:04 EST --- pymongo-1.9-4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pymongo-1.9-4.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 644708] Review Request: pymongo - Python driver for MongoDB
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644708 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 543154] Review Request: mingw32-SDL_mixer - Simple DirectMedia Layer's Sample Mixer Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543154 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 05:45:49 EST --- mingw32-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-1.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 644708] Review Request: pymongo - Python driver for MongoDB
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644708 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 05:48:46 EST --- pymongo-1.9-4.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pymongo-1.9-4.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 543154] Review Request: mingw32-SDL_mixer - Simple DirectMedia Layer's Sample Mixer Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543154 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 05:52:02 EST --- mingw32-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-1.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 644708] Review Request: pymongo - Python driver for MongoDB
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644708 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 05:59:32 EST --- pymongo-1.9-8.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pymongo-1.9-8.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642985] Review Request: rubygem-timecop - Provides a unified method to mock Time.now, Date.today in a single call
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642985 Michal Fojtik changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(mfoj...@redhat.co | |m) | --- Comment #6 from Michal Fojtik 2010-11-09 07:13:12 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > By the way for bug 640608: > > It seems that > $ ruby -e 'otime = Time.now ; sleep(1) ; ctime=Time.now ; puts ctime - otime' > will call system calls: gettimeofday -> select -> gettimeofday. > > However it seems that select() sometimes sleeps less time than > requested: > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/8/29/232 > ... which seems fixed in kernel 2.6.28. So RHEL5 host may suffer from > this issue? (and perl seems to be using nanosleep instead of select) Well, I AFAIK this bug is related just for Xen guests. Bare metal installations of RHEL5 is not suffering with this. And it's issue in kernel as far as I discussed with some kernel engineers. (In reply to comment #4) > Created attachment 454912 [details] > Use nanosleep() instead of select() for ruby sleep() > > If bug 640608 is related to select(), the attached patch may > worth trying. Yes definitely, this patch looks OK for solving this issue. I'll give it a try today and send you the results. + Agree on disabling those tests (for now). All tests are now passed in Koji. = -2 === * Thu Nov 09 2010 Michal Fojtik - 0.3.5-2 - Disabled test_time_stack_item test Spec URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-timecop.spec SRPM URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-timecop-0.3.5-2.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 440679] Review Request: lua-sql - Database connectivity for Lua
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=440679 --- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-09 08:02:38 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603481] Review Request: freerdp - remote desktop protocol client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603481 --- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 07:51:26 EST --- freerdp-0.8.1-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freerdp-0.8.1-2.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603481] Review Request: freerdp - remote desktop protocol client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603481 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649356] Review Request: luakit - Micro-browser framework based on WebKit and GTK+
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649356
Peter Lemenkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Peter Lemenkov 2010-11-09 09:44:51 EST
---
Latest koji scratch build for F-14:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2590022
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+ rpmlint is NOT silent
work ~: rpmlint ~/Desktop/luakit-*
luakit.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US behaviour -> behavior,
behave, behalves
^^^ false positive
luakit.src:35: W: macro-in-comment %doc
^^^ may be safely omitted
luakit.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
^^^ ok for recent Fedora versions but may produce issues in EPEL.
luakit.src: W: invalid-url Source0: luakit-2010.09.24.tar.gz
^^^ Ok, for github's projects.
luakit.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US behaviour -> behavior,
behave, behalves
^^^ false positive
luakit.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/xdg/luakit/theme.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/xdg/luakit/modes.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/xdg/luakit/globals.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/xdg/luakit/binds.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/xdg/luakit/window.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/xdg/luakit/webview.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/xdg/luakit/rc.lua
^^^ please, comment this - should these files be +x and/or should ther be
really marked as %config
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/session.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /etc/xdg/luakit/theme.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /etc/xdg/luakit/modes.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/lousy/init.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/go_next_prev.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/lousy/theme.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /etc/xdg/luakit/globals.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/bookmarks.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/lousy/util.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/applications/luakit.desktop
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /etc/xdg/luakit/binds.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/go_up.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/lousy/mode.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/formfiller.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/luakit/lib/follow_selected.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /etc/xdg/luakit/window.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /etc/xdg/luakit/webview.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/follow.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/lousy/bind.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /etc/xdg/luakit/rc.lua
luakit.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/luakit/lib/go_input.lua
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 28 errors, 5 warnings.
work ~:
^^^ these files are marked as +x but no shebang was added. Could you, please
explain this - should they really be marked as executable?
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (GPLv3
or later).
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum
mason-larobina-luakit-2010.09.24-0-gb9d8591.tar.gz luakit-2010.09.24.tar.gz
21629e4de89893759852f16807172a56dc550d1e1654d4e106cf9378b387cd41
mason-larobina-luakit-2010.09.24-0-gb9d8591.tar.gz
21629e4de89893759852f16807172a56dc550d1e1654d4e106cf9378b387cd41
luakit-2010.09.24.tar.gz
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES:
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture. See koji links above.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
0 No shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's default paths.
+ The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
0 The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directori
[Bug 648266] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON - Easy manipulation of JSON headers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648266 --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-09 08:04:53 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 644335] Review Request: rubygem-mustache - Mustache is a framework-agnostic way to render logic-free views
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644335 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-09 08:04:33 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 641271] Review Request: openerp-client - Open Source ERP Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641271 Raphaël Valyi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rva...@gmail.com --- Comment #9 from Raphaël Valyi 2010-11-09 09:09:49 EST --- Guys, I'm an OpenERP integrator and contributor. I understand the issue about the license mix and hope they will sort this out soon. But: If I understand correctly, the issue is only about the GTK client. Well, why don't you package the server and the web-client who don't have those issues (to my knowledge) and hold only the client? You have to know that the GTK client will probably be used from others PC's that are more likely to run Windows than Fedora (client-side) and in any case, the GTK client is totally optional, once you installed the "web-client" component, OpenERP can be accessed fully in your browser. So why not package the server first? Finally, I tel you: beware of what is said about OpenERP: there is a high discrepancy between the marketing and the reality unfortunately (read about experience third parties integration in forums and list to know the truth; no well known open source ERP has a better story either to my knowledge unfortunately), so my point is: don't bother to package the 5.0 version it's useless, only usable by alien integrators managing to stabilize it , not stable and usable directly in production. So you'll need to package version 6.x instead. Well, not so easy either given it's still developed, may be you'll be able to package the coming RC2 and coming releases (6.x are likely to be more professional cause it's finally tested systematically). Given the relative instability of the whole (though improving fortunately), distro packages of OpenERP will only be usable if they are updated often (like every month), and if it's easy for and advanced users to apply bzr patches that come from Launchpad (indeed the issue, is that it's very hard to find a version with no bug or no regression, you always has to fix bugs for your use case to make it work). All installed I've seen of OpenERP where always made from source using bzr and only worked if great professionals where supporting it. All right, hope this helps. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 645764] Review Request: django-addons - to add plugging functionality in your projects easier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=645764 Domingo Becker changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Domingo Becker 2010-11-09 08:04:16 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: django-addons Short Description: A framework to create pluggable Django add-ons Owners: beckerde Branches: f13 f14 el5 el6 InitialCC: glezos diegobz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649356] Review Request: luakit - Micro-browser framework based on WebKit and GTK+
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649356 --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-09 10:26:59 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 638590] Review Request: freemind - a mind-mapping software written in Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638590 Stanislav Ochotnicky changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||socho...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|socho...@redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-11-09 10:02:10 EST --- I'll do the review since I like freemind :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649356] Review Request: luakit - Micro-browser framework based on WebKit and GTK+
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649356 Pierre Carrier changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Pierre Carrier 2010-11-09 09:53:21 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: luakit Short Description: Micro-browser framework based on WebKit and GTK+ Owners: pcarrier Branches: f14 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648267] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity - Make tamper-resistant links in CGI::Application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648267 --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-09 08:05:26 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 575466] Review Request: gtk-aurora-engine - Aurora GTK+ theme engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575466 --- Comment #21 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-09 08:03:22 EST --- It is too late to request F-12 branches. Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 645764] Review Request: django-addons - to add plugging functionality in your projects easier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=645764 --- Comment #14 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-09 08:33:27 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 561462] Review Request: jaffl - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561462 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 10:39:38 EST --- jaffl-0.5.4-4.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jaffl-0.5.4-4.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 561462] Review Request: jaffl - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561462 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 561462] Review Request: jaffl - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561462 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 10:40:32 EST --- jaffl-0.5.4-4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jaffl-0.5.4-4.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123 --- Comment #4 from Jeffrey Ness 2010-11-09 10:43:50 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > Please clear the Whiteboard when you provide a package which builds. > > I searched the account database but I could not find any account matching your > name or email address. Do you not yet have a Fedora account? Might be a good > idea to read http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join for all > sorts of information, including how to use our buildsystem to test your > package. Good morning Jason, I did create a Fedora account yesterday while reading over the documentation you posted above. My Fedora account name is 'flip387' and the email address is the same as my bugzilla account. Let me know if that helps. Thanks Jeffrey- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey Ness 2010-11-09 10:58:49
EST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Hi Jeffrey
>
> your package will not build as it presently stands.
>
> Please be sure to install rpmdevtools and follow all the guidelines here to
> build your Fedora package:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package
> and here
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
>
> A few things in particular:
> - your LICENSE file in your source states GPLv2 whereas you have specified GPL
> in the spec file
> - you need to specify the full URL of your Source0
> - your release number should start at 1 not 0
> - you cannot unpack files into /opt when you are building packages in your
> spec
> file (you should not be installing anything under /opt in any case). The line
> 'setup -q' will unpack the source named under Source0 for you into
> ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/%{name}-%{version} where your package is built. Everything in
> the spec file is executed relative to here. In your case you could omit the
> %build section and simply move the required files from this area to your
> buildroot in your %install section.
> - your %post is better suited to a README file
> - you will also need to clean up your files section, including adding a %doc
> line to include your license file and any other documents you wish to be
> included in the package such as AUTHOR, README - refer to the links above
>
> Once you've attacked those things and can successfully build your package
> using
> rpmbuild be sure to run rpmlint against the generated src package and post
> thre
> results back here.
>
> hope that helps,
>
> Brendan
Hello Brendan,
Thank you very much for this information, it has been very useful in my
entering of the RPM development scene.
I have been re-rewriting my SPEC file and took in your considerations above:
Spec URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/sarGraphs-1.1-1.spec
SRPM URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
--
I have also found the 'rpmlint' tool to be a great asset, below you can find
the current results:
rpmlint ../SRPMS/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
sarGraphs.src: W: summary-not-capitalized sarGraphs takes the output of sysstat
and creates a graphical PHP Web interface.
sarGraphs.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot sarGraphs takes the output of sysstat
and creates a graphical PHP Web interface.
sarGraphs.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary sarGraphs
sarGraphs.src: E: invalid-spec-name
sarGraphs.src:24: E: files-attr-not-set
sarGraphs.src:25: E: files-attr-not-set
sarGraphs.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
sarGraphs.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
sarGraphs.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
sarGraphs.src: W: no-%build-section
sarGraphs.src: W: no-%clean-section
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 8 warnings.
--
I believe the 3 errors can be over looked. I do not need to set the default
file attributes, and I believe my SPEC file naming convention matches that of
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Naming. As for the warnings
nothing stands out to something I would need to correct.
I'm going to attempt to build on the Fedora Build system , however at the
moment it seems the site 'https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/login' is under
high load. I will attempt one of these mock builds when the site is available.
Thanks
Jeffrey-
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648549] Review Request: spice-vdagent - Agent for Spice guests
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648549 --- Comment #6 from Germán Racca 2010-11-09 10:58:35 EST --- Hi Hans! Thanks very much for your explanations about rpmlint output. As I said above, there were some warnings/errors I didn't see before so I needed to see your comments about them. Now it is all clear for me...and you didn't sound grumpy, so don't worry about that :) Some items that remains to check now that you, as upstream, released a modified version. Some things like checksums didn't change because you only patched the original code. === REQUIRED ITEMS === [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architec ture. Tested on: x86_64 [x] Rpmlint output: spice-vdagent.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US uinput -> input, u input, sinciput spice-vdagent.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US uinput -> input, u input, sinciput spice-vdagent.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/xdg/autostart/spice-vdagent.desktop spice-vdagent.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary spice-vdagentd spice-vdagent.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary spice-vdagent spice-vdagent.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/spice-vdagentd spice-vdagent.x86_64: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/spice-vdagentd $prog spice-vdagent.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/spice-vdagentd === SUGGESTED ITEMS === [x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Tested on: x86_64 === Final Notes === 1. Now the real problem rpmlint detected is fixed and all those warnings were explained by you in a previous comment. 2. Now I was able to successfully build the package in mock. Therefore, your package is... *** APPROVED *** I have tried to be as much clear as I could, but my English is poor, so if something remained obscure please let me know. Also, I would like to hear from you how I have been doing in my first review, so I can continue reviewing other packages also. All the best, Germán. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 644335] Review Request: rubygem-mustache - Mustache is a framework-agnostic way to render logic-free views
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644335 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 11:37:19 EST --- rubygem-mustache-0.11.2-3.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-mustache-0.11.2-3.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 638418] Review Request: ehcache (for cloud package in bug #630179)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638418 --- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov 2010-11-09 11:15:35 EST --- Are you still interested in getting this into Fedora or we should close the bug? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 531107] Review Request: perl-SQL-Tokenizer - A Perl package to tokenize SQL, generically
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531107 Marcela Mašláňová changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(da...@fetter.org) --- Comment #17 from Marcela Mašláňová 2010-11-09 11:09:59 EST --- perl-SQL-Tokenizer.src: E: unknown-key GPG#b73652a5 ^ I suppose this is false positive. Key is not needed for functionality. perl-SQL-Tokenizer.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/SQL/._Tokenizer.pm This is installed. Is it needed? If not, could you remove it? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 622820] Review Request: acgvision-agent - Monitoring client for ACGVision
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=622820 --- Comment #6 from Alexander Kurtakov 2010-11-09 11:07:39 EST --- Sorry for the delay I missed your last comment. Do you still want me to do the review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 640889] Review Request: q4wine - Qt4 GUI for wine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=640889 leigh scott changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED CC||leigh123li...@googlemail.co ||m Resolution|ERRATA | Keywords||Reopened --- Comment #21 from leigh scott 2010-11-09 11:03:07 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) > APPROVED. > > Dmitrij - do you still need sponsorship? I can do that if needed. What is > your FAS account name? Have you applied for packager group membership? It's > been a long time since I sponsored someone, so I'm sure the procedure has > changed a bit. How could you approve a package that contains bundled libs? (qtsingleapplication) It will need patching so it uses system libs instead http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=10602 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 575466] Review Request: gtk-aurora-engine - Aurora GTK+ theme engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575466 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 11:44:20 EST --- gtk-aurora-engine-1.5.1-4.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gtk-aurora-engine-1.5.1-4.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 575466] Review Request: gtk-aurora-engine - Aurora GTK+ theme engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575466 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 527462] Review Request: python-gmpy - Python interface to GMP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527462
--- Comment #22 from Michael J Gruber 2010-11-09
11:45:57 EST ---
(In reply to comment #19)
[I've learnt by now that rpmlint is called rpmlint and speclint for a good
reason...]
I've incorporated all suggestions including
> chmod 755 %{buildroot}%{python_sitearch}/gmpy.so
>
> at the end of %install.
even though rpmlint does not show the corresponding warning for me, and on my
system gmpy.so gets installed 755 even without it. If setup.py is indeed umask
dependent I'd call it borken...
New spec and srpm are at
http://mjg.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/gmpy.spec
http://mjg.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/gmpy-1.13-2.fc14.src.rpm
F14 builds at
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2590481
* Tue Nov 11 2010 Michael J Gruber 1.13-2
- avoid automatic provides for .so
- add check section rather than bundling the tests
- convert latin1 doc file to utf8 during prep
- chmod 755 the installed .so
Cheers,
Michael
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 575466] Review Request: gtk-aurora-engine - Aurora GTK+ theme engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575466 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 11:53:22 EST --- gtk-aurora-engine-1.5.1-4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gtk-aurora-engine-1.5.1-4.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 644335] Review Request: rubygem-mustache - Mustache is a framework-agnostic way to render logic-free views
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644335 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 11:18:49 EST --- rubygem-mustache-0.11.2-3.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-mustache-0.11.2-3.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 644335] Review Request: rubygem-mustache - Mustache is a framework-agnostic way to render logic-free views
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=644335 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey Ness 2010-11-09 11:27:26
EST ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Hi Jeffrey
> >
> > your package will not build as it presently stands.
> >
> > Please be sure to install rpmdevtools and follow all the guidelines here to
> > build your Fedora package:
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package
> > and here
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
> >
> > A few things in particular:
> > - your LICENSE file in your source states GPLv2 whereas you have specified
> > GPL
> > in the spec file
> > - you need to specify the full URL of your Source0
> > - your release number should start at 1 not 0
> > - you cannot unpack files into /opt when you are building packages in your
> > spec
> > file (you should not be installing anything under /opt in any case). The
> > line
> > 'setup -q' will unpack the source named under Source0 for you into
> > ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/%{name}-%{version} where your package is built. Everything
> > in
> > the spec file is executed relative to here. In your case you could omit the
> > %build section and simply move the required files from this area to your
> > buildroot in your %install section.
> > - your %post is better suited to a README file
> > - you will also need to clean up your files section, including adding a %doc
> > line to include your license file and any other documents you wish to be
> > included in the package such as AUTHOR, README - refer to the links above
> >
> > Once you've attacked those things and can successfully build your package
> > using
> > rpmbuild be sure to run rpmlint against the generated src package and post
> > thre
> > results back here.
> >
> > hope that helps,
> >
> > Brendan
>
> Hello Brendan,
>
> Thank you very much for this information, it has been very useful in my
> entering of the RPM development scene.
>
> I have been re-rewriting my SPEC file and took in your considerations above:
>
> Spec URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/sarGraphs-1.1-1.spec
> SRPM URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
>
> --
>
> I have also found the 'rpmlint' tool to be a great asset, below you can find
> the current results:
>
> rpmlint ../SRPMS/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
> sarGraphs.src: W: summary-not-capitalized sarGraphs takes the output of
> sysstat
> and creates a graphical PHP Web interface.
> sarGraphs.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot sarGraphs takes the output of sysstat
> and creates a graphical PHP Web interface.
> sarGraphs.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary sarGraphs
> sarGraphs.src: E: invalid-spec-name
> sarGraphs.src:24: E: files-attr-not-set
> sarGraphs.src:25: E: files-attr-not-set
> sarGraphs.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
> sarGraphs.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
> sarGraphs.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
> sarGraphs.src: W: no-%build-section
> sarGraphs.src: W: no-%clean-section
> 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 8 warnings.
> --
>
> I believe the 3 errors can be over looked. I do not need to set the default
> file attributes, and I believe my SPEC file naming convention matches that of
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Naming. As for the warnings
> nothing stands out to something I would need to correct.
>
> I'm going to attempt to build on the Fedora Build system , however at the
> moment it seems the site 'https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/login' is under
> high load. I will attempt one of these mock builds when the site is available.
>
> Thanks
> Jeffrey-
Greetings,
I have been able to run this Source RPM on the Build system, unfortunately it
failed. While checking the build.log I get this message below (failed to write
to /usr/share):
+ /bin/cp -a /builddir/build/BUILD/sarGraphs-1.1 /usr/share
/bin/cp: cannot create directory `/usr/share/sarGraphs-1.1': Permission denied
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.89564 (%install)
--
I guess I'm abit confused at this point, how would I go about moving my source
from the RPM to its final resting place?
Thanks for any advise.
Jeffrey-
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 622820] Review Request: acgvision-agent - Monitoring client for ACGVision
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=622820 --- Comment #7 from Rémi Debay 2010-11-09 11:23:46 EST --- No worries, Yes I d be happy if u could review my package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 623868] Review Request: abattis-cantarell-fonts - Contemporary humanist sans-serif font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=623868 Michael J Gruber changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #7 from Michael J Gruber 2010-11-09 12:01:08 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) > I sat down with the upstream developer (Dave Crossland) at FUDCon Zurich > today, > and I've helped him package up his font. > > We done a few things differently than the above spec file, including pulling > in > the separate .sfd files as sources instead of the .zip file, updating the > license text, and a few other minor changes. > > If nobody objects, I'll CC Dave on this bug, as he is eager to work to become > the primary maintainer of his own font package. Jared, have you been able to upload spec and srpm somewhere so that it is available for review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey Ness 2010-11-09 12:08:25
EST ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
> > > Hi Jeffrey
> > >
> > > your package will not build as it presently stands.
> > >
> > > Please be sure to install rpmdevtools and follow all the guidelines here
> > > to
> > > build your Fedora package:
> > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package
> > > and here
> > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
> > >
> > > A few things in particular:
> > > - your LICENSE file in your source states GPLv2 whereas you have
> > > specified GPL
> > > in the spec file
> > > - you need to specify the full URL of your Source0
> > > - your release number should start at 1 not 0
> > > - you cannot unpack files into /opt when you are building packages in
> > > your spec
> > > file (you should not be installing anything under /opt in any case). The
> > > line
> > > 'setup -q' will unpack the source named under Source0 for you into
> > > ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/%{name}-%{version} where your package is built.
> > > Everything in
> > > the spec file is executed relative to here. In your case you could omit
> > > the
> > > %build section and simply move the required files from this area to your
> > > buildroot in your %install section.
> > > - your %post is better suited to a README file
> > > - you will also need to clean up your files section, including adding a
> > > %doc
> > > line to include your license file and any other documents you wish to be
> > > included in the package such as AUTHOR, README - refer to the links above
> > >
> > > Once you've attacked those things and can successfully build your package
> > > using
> > > rpmbuild be sure to run rpmlint against the generated src package and
> > > post thre
> > > results back here.
> > >
> > > hope that helps,
> > >
> > > Brendan
> >
> > Hello Brendan,
> >
> > Thank you very much for this information, it has been very useful in my
> > entering of the RPM development scene.
> >
> > I have been re-rewriting my SPEC file and took in your considerations above:
> >
> > Spec URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/sarGraphs-1.1-1.spec
> > SRPM URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
> >
> > --
> >
> > I have also found the 'rpmlint' tool to be a great asset, below you can find
> > the current results:
> >
> > rpmlint ../SRPMS/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
> > sarGraphs.src: W: summary-not-capitalized sarGraphs takes the output of
> > sysstat
> > and creates a graphical PHP Web interface.
> > sarGraphs.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot sarGraphs takes the output of
> > sysstat
> > and creates a graphical PHP Web interface.
> > sarGraphs.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary sarGraphs
> > sarGraphs.src: E: invalid-spec-name
> > sarGraphs.src:24: E: files-attr-not-set
> > sarGraphs.src:25: E: files-attr-not-set
> > sarGraphs.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
> > sarGraphs.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
> > sarGraphs.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
> > sarGraphs.src: W: no-%build-section
> > sarGraphs.src: W: no-%clean-section
> > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 8 warnings.
> > --
> >
> > I believe the 3 errors can be over looked. I do not need to set the default
> > file attributes, and I believe my SPEC file naming convention matches that
> > of
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Naming. As for the
> > warnings
> > nothing stands out to something I would need to correct.
> >
> > I'm going to attempt to build on the Fedora Build system , however at the
> > moment it seems the site 'https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/login' is
> > under
> > high load. I will attempt one of these mock builds when the site is
> > available.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Jeffrey-
>
> Greetings,
>
> I have been able to run this Source RPM on the Build system, unfortunately it
> failed. While checking the build.log I get this message below (failed to write
> to /usr/share):
>
> + /bin/cp -a /builddir/build/BUILD/sarGraphs-1.1 /usr/share
> /bin/cp: cannot create directory `/usr/share/sarGraphs-1.1': Permission denied
> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.89564 (%install)
>
> --
>
> I guess I'm abit confused at this point, how would I go about moving my source
> from the RPM to its final resting place?
>
> Thanks for any advise.
> Jeffrey-
Alright, I believe I have resolved my issues and created this RPM the correct
way.
I have been successful on building the SRPM on the Build System:
$ koji build --arch-override=i386 --scratch dist-5E-epel
/usr/src/redhat/SRPMS/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
Uploading srpm: /usr/src/redhat/SRPMS/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
[] 100% 00:00:19 4.42 MiB 229.03 KiB/sec
Created task: 2590548
Task info: http://koji.fedorapr
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123 Jeffrey Ness changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|BuildFails | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 623868] Review Request: abattis-cantarell-fonts - Contemporary humanist sans-serif font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=623868 --- Comment #8 from Jared Smith 2010-11-09 12:45:35 EST --- I was hoping that Dave would step up and submit the spec and SRPM himself, as he showed interest in becoming a font packager, and it would obviously be ideal to have the upstream developer be the packager. That being said, I'll go ahead and post the spec and SRPM that Dave and I worked on in Zurich. (Please note that I'm not yet an official packager, but I do have some experiencing in packaging RPMs, and should probably apply to become a packager. In other words, feedback and commentary is greatly appreciated.) http://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/Fonts/abattis-cantarell/abattis-cantarell.spec http://jsmith.fedorapeople.org/Packaging/Fonts/abattis-cantarell/abattis-cantarell-fonts-1.001-2.fc13.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518316] Review Request: vanessa_adt - Library of Abstract Data Types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518316 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 13:02:36 EST --- vanessa_adt-0.0.7-6.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518316] Review Request: vanessa_adt - Library of Abstract Data Types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518316 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||vanessa_adt-0.0.7-6.el5 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-11-09 13:02:42 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 646139] Review Request: KXStitch - tool that creates cross stitch patterns
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=646139 Martin Gieseking changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|martin.giesek...@uos.de Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #6 from Martin Gieseking 2010-11-09 13:20:06 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) > Concerning the output of rpmlint: I think I will keep it like this for the > moment because honestly I am not so sure if the typical REHL user is > interested > in this package. That's no problem. You can freely choose the distro branches you're planning to maintain a package for. > I am aware of the fact that I have to show my understanding of the Packaging > Guidelines and I already started participating (see > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=647076 and > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592628). Now that I now that my > package follows the Guidelines more or less I will start doing some informal > reviews. OK, thanks for the info. Let me know once you've posted your first informal review. I will have a look at your comments then. > Hopefully I can convince you that sponsoring me is the right thing to do. ;) We will see. :) Since you don't have to know every little detail of the guidelines to get sponsored, and since you'll continuously learn by doing afterwards, it's sufficient to show that you're heading in the right direction. Just don't feel discouraged if your comments get corrected or criticized by other packagers. That's part of the learning process. If you have any questions, feel free to send me an email. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651521] Review Request: qtwebkit - Qt WebKit bindings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651521 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||qtwebkit -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651521] New: Review Request: qtwebkit - Qt WebKit bindings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: qtwebkit - Qt WebKit bindings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651521 Summary: Review Request: qtwebkit - Qt WebKit bindings Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rdie...@math.unl.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qtwebkit/qtwebkit.spec SRPM URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qtwebkit/qtwebkit-2.0-2.fc13.src.rpm Description: Qt WebKit bindings This is a standalone/unbundled version of what's currently included in qt packaging. Once approved, qt packaging will require modifications (to omit qtwebkit bits) koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2590691 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 629660] Review Request: apache-poi - The Java API for Microsoft Documents
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=629660 --- Comment #11 from Terje Røsten 2010-11-09 13:33:46 EST --- There are too many changes in rawhide for my package to build (not related to poi), however the POM and depmap looks good. Let's go for it. BTW: should jakarta-commons-logging deps be switched to apache-commons-logging? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123 Carl Thompson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fed...@red-dragon.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@red-dragon.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 622820] Review Request: acgvision-agent - Monitoring client for ACGVision
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=622820
--- Comment #8 from Alexander Kurtakov 2010-11-09
15:21:01 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
acgvision-agent-javadoc.noarch: W: non-standard-group Development
Documentation
Use Documentation only
./SPECS/acgvision-agent.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
Not a problem in recent Fedora.
./SPECS/acgvision-agent.spec:54: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line
54, tab: line 1)
Please use either tabs or spaces.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[!] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
You miss the following requires
Requires(post): chkconfig
Requires(preun): chkconfig
# This is for /sbin/service
Requires(preun): initscripts
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type:GPLv2 in spec but GPLv3 in the copying.txt and license files
shipped with sources
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package:f91be30d4fb8fad9d5e15f8e51b28482
MD5SUM upstream package:f91be30d4fb8fad9d5e15f8e51b28482
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[-] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
trball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x ] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name}-%{version} with
%{_javadocdir}/%{name} symlink
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}-%{version}.jar with
%{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (unversioned) symlink
[-] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
=== Issues ===
1. Fix rpmlint
2. Fix missing requires per guidelines
3. Fix license
4. Replace hardcoded directories with macroses per
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:RPMMacros
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648549] Review Request: spice-vdagent - Agent for Spice guests
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648549 Hans de Goede changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Hans de Goede 2010-11-09 15:21:40 EST --- Hi, Thanks for the review. You forgot to set the fedora-review flag to +, can you please do that? Regards, Hans -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 629660] Review Request: apache-poi - The Java API for Microsoft Documents
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=629660 --- Comment #12 from Orion Poplawski 2010-11-09 15:29:25 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) > There are too many changes in rawhide for my package to build (not related to > poi), however the POM and depmap looks good. Let's go for it. Great. Just waiting for the package to be created then. > BTW: should jakarta-commons-logging deps be switched to > apache-commons-logging? Yup, done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123
Brendan Jones changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|fed...@red-dragon.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #8 from Brendan Jones 2010-11-09
15:28:44 EST ---
Hi Jeffrey
your rpmlint output gives you a few errors should be addressed:
- remove version info from your spec file name
- your summary should be a single line something like - "A graphical PHP
sysstat interface" whilst your description would go into a little more detail
about exactly what it does
- you need to set your file attributes in the files section:
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
Also,
- you are missing a trailing curly bracket in your %install section
- remove the comment from your install section and change the last line to
%{__cp} -av * %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}
- if you are upstream consider renaming to sargraphs
Anyway, hope that helps
Brendan
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 640889] Review Request: q4wine - Qt4 GUI for wine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=640889 --- Comment #22 from Orion Poplawski 2010-11-09 15:33:25 EST --- Missed that, sorry. I looked for it in the main qt package, but didn't realize it was a separate qt library. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey Ness 2010-11-09 15:53:13
EST ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Hi Jeffrey
>
> your rpmlint output gives you a few errors should be addressed:
>
> - remove version info from your spec file name
> - your summary should be a single line something like - "A graphical PHP
> sysstat interface" whilst your description would go into a little more detail
> about exactly what it does
> - you need to set your file attributes in the files section:
>
> %files
> %defattr(-,root,root,-)
>
>
> Also,
>
> - you are missing a trailing curly bracket in your %install section
> - remove the comment from your install section and change the last line to
> %{__cp} -av * %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}
> - if you are upstream consider renaming to sargraphs
>
> Anyway, hope that helps
>
> Brendan
Thanks for the great information Brendan! It seems I may not of placed the
correct SPEC file at the URL mentioned above.
Below is my new rpmlint without errors or warnings:
$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
--
And a successful build on the Fedora Build System:
$ koji build --scratch dist-5E-epel
/usr/src/redhat/SRPMS/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
Uploading srpm: /usr/src/redhat/SRPMS/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
[] 100% 00:00:11 4.42 MiB 396.80 KiB/sec
Created task: 2591623
Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2591623
Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)...
2591623 build (dist-5E-epel, sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm): free
2591623 build (dist-5E-epel, sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm): free -> open
(x86-01.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2591625 buildArch (sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm, noarch): open
(x86-17.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2591625 buildArch (sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm, noarch): open
(x86-17.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
0 free 1 open 1 done 0 failed
2591623 build (dist-5E-epel, sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm): open
(x86-01.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
0 free 0 open 2 done 0 failed
2591623 build (dist-5E-epel, sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm) completed successfully
--
Below are the links to the SRPM and SPEC:
Spec URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/sarGraphs.spec
SRPM URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/sarGraphs-1.1-1.src.rpm
--
Thanks for being patient and giving excellent advise!!
Jeffrey-
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603481] Review Request: freerdp - remote desktop protocol client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603481 Magnus Glantz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mgla...@redhat.com --- Comment #30 from Magnus Glantz 2010-11-09 15:55:43 EST --- Great job! Thank you so much to Mads Kiilerich and all involved. I'm so happy to see this package in Fedora! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651591] New: Review Request: partiwm - partitioning window manager and related tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: partiwm - partitioning window manager and related tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651591 Summary: Review Request: partiwm - partitioning window manager and related tools Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: a...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://ajax.fedorapeople.org/partiwm/partiwm.spec SRPM URL: http://ajax.fedorapeople.org/partiwm/partiwm-0.0.6-1.20101109.fc13.src.rpm Description: The partiwm package provides: - a python library, wimpiggy, for writing compositing window managers - a partitioning window manager using wimpiggy - a "screen for X" implementation using wimpiggy -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649356] Review Request: luakit - Micro-browser framework based on WebKit and GTK+
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649356 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 16:22:30 EST --- luakit-2010.09.24-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/luakit-2010.09.24-1.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649356] Review Request: luakit - Micro-browser framework based on WebKit and GTK+
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649356 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123 Terje Røsten changed: What|Removed |Added CC||terje...@phys.ntnu.no --- Comment #10 from Terje Røsten 2010-11-09 16:28:43 EST --- You seems to ship a version of jpgraph in the package. That is not allowed. jpgraph must be shipped in a separate package. What is the license on jpgraph? Can it be used by GPL software? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648549] Review Request: spice-vdagent - Agent for Spice guests
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648549 Germán Racca changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Germán Racca 2010-11-09 16:30:40 EST --- I'm sorry Hans. Now it's ok. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648549] Review Request: spice-vdagent - Agent for Spice guests
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648549 --- Comment #9 from Hans de Goede 2010-11-09 16:37:50 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: spice-vdagent Short Description: Agent for Spice guests Owners: jwrdegoede Branches: f14 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651613] Review Request: haddock - Haskell documentation tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651613 Lakshmi Narasimhan changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|low |medium CC||fedora-haskell-l...@redhat. ||com Blocks||634048(Haskell-pkg-reviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123 --- Comment #11 from Jeffrey Ness 2010-11-09 16:58:26 EST --- JpGraph is Licensed under the QPL 1.0 (Qt Free License) http://jpgraph.net/download/, this is not allowed? Jeffrey- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651613] New: Review Request: haddock - Haskell documentation tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: haddock - Haskell documentation tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651613 Summary: Review Request: haddock - Haskell documentation tool Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lakshminaras2...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL : https://sites.google.com/site/lakshminaras2002/home/haddock.spec?attredirects=0&d=1 SRPM URL : https://sites.google.com/site/lakshminaras2002/home/haddock-2.7.2-2.fc14.src.rpm?attredirects=0&d=1 rpmlint output: ghc-haddock.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell -> Gaskell, Gaitskell, Skellum The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. ghc-haddock-devel.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell -> Gaskell, Gaitskell, Skellum The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. ghc-haddock-prof.i686: E: devel-dependency ghc-haddock-devel Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package itself. ghc-haddock-prof.i686: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. ghc-haddock-prof.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/ghc-6.12.3/haddock-2.7.2/libHShaddock-2.7.2_p.a A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a development package. haddock.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell -> Gaskell, Gaitskell, Skellum The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. haddock.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary haddock-2.7.2 Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. haddock.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell -> Gaskell, Gaitskell, Skellum The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. 5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 7 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651613] Review Request: haddock - Haskell documentation tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651613 Lakshmi Narasimhan changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||haddock -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649356] Review Request: luakit - Micro-browser framework based on WebKit and GTK+
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649356 Pierre Carrier changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-11-09 17:04:55 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648945] Review Request: maven - Java project management and project comprehension tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648945 --- Comment #1 from Deepak Bhole 2010-11-09 17:18:07 EST --- It does not build for me with latest rawhide. Error is due to missing commons-parent: ... ... [INFO] Unable to find resource 'org.apache.commons:commons-parent:pom:12' in repository __jpp_repo__ (file:///usr/share/maven2/repository) ... ... [INFO] Trace org.apache.maven.lifecycle.LifecycleExecutionException: Unable to get dependency information: Unable to read the metadata file for artifact 'commons-lang:commons-lang:jar': Cannot find parent: org.apache.commons:commons-parent for project: commons-lang:commons-lang:jar:2.5 for project commons-lang:commons-lang:jar:2.5 ... ... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651123] Review Request: sarGraphs - Graphical System Usage Web Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651123 --- Comment #12 from Jeffrey Ness 2010-11-09 17:43:23 EST --- Disregard last comment, I found 'Good Licenses' at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Good_Licenses and show the QPL is a Valid FSF but not GPLv2 or GPLv3 compat. I guess this means I would need to package JpGraph in a separate RPM (As I did not show a JpGraph package already available on EPEL), then depend on that in my package? Jeffrey- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651227] Review Request: python-sleekxmpp - Flexible XMPP client/component/server library for Python >= 2.6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651227 Thomas Spura changed: What|Removed |Added CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #1 from Thomas Spura 2010-11-09 18:02:40 EST --- Please take a look, how to build the python3 subpackage at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Building_more_than_once That way, building also happens in %build. I don't think you need the big %if with_python3 macro everywhere, if you only want to build for F13 and up. Or to which release will this be targeted? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651227] Review Request: python-sleekxmpp - Flexible XMPP client/component/server library for Python >= 2.6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651227 --- Comment #2 from Thomas Spura 2010-11-09 18:04:16 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > Please take a look, how to build the python3 subpackage at: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Building_more_than_once > > That way, building also happens in %build. > > I don't think you need the big %if with_python3 macro everywhere, if you only > want to build for F13 and up. > Or to which release will this be targeted? I mean with that, please use %py3dir to do the building in another directory, etc -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 578024] Review Request: ingres - Relational DBMS Server and Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=578024 Jay Hankinson changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(jeremy.hankinson@ | |ingres.com) | --- Comment #34 from Jay Hankinson 2010-11-09 18:22:50 EST --- Sorry, the ftp server has an over zealous cleanup script and keeps removing my files. They've been reposted in the same place so the links should work again. Not all the files under /usr/libexec/ingres _have_ to be owned by ingres but some of them do. It's allowed as far as the standards are concerned though. /var/lib/ingres/files/ucharmaps is an odd one. The files in there won't change but we all custom coercions to be defined and they would be put in this directory. There's no easy way to define an alternate location for these files so they need to be in a writable location. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651227] Review Request: python-sleekxmpp - Flexible XMPP client/component/server library for Python >= 2.6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651227 --- Comment #3 from Florent Le Coz 2010-11-09 18:30:19 EST --- Ok, I'll do that, thank you very much. And that's targeted for F13 and above only. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 491331] Review Request: spacewalk-config - Spacewalk Configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491331
--- Comment #11 from Ruediger Landmann 2010-11-09
18:36:00 EST ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> > - startup.pl and satidmap.pl should be tagged %config or not be in
> >%{_sysconfdir}. The latter is something that be fixed upstream but not in
> >packaging.
> I moved satidmap.pl to /usr/share/rhn. No problem here.
> But I have problem with startup.pl. It is perl executable. Not configuration
> file. This is file which mod_perl call during its start. And it always put in
> apache configuration. I tried to search for some mod_perl aplication in
> Fedora,
> but find none.
> I hesitate to mark this one file as config and also move it to other place.
Could you place it in /usr/share/rhn too, and load it with a config file in
/etc/httpd/conf.d? The /etc/httpd/conf.d/README file also notes:
"Files are processed in alphabetical order, so if using configuration
directives which depend on, say, mod_perl being loaded, ensure that
these are placed in a filename later in the sort order than "perl.conf"."
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 491331] Review Request: spacewalk-config - Spacewalk Configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491331 Ruediger Landmann changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(msu...@redhat.com ||) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 578024] Review Request: ingres - Relational DBMS Server and Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=578024 --- Comment #35 from Cristian Ciupitu 2010-11-09 18:41:41 EST --- (In reply to comment #34) > Sorry, the ftp server has an over zealous cleanup script and keeps removing my > files. They've been reposted in the same place so the links should work again. They seem to work now. > Not all the files under /usr/libexec/ingres _have_ to be owned by ingres but > some of them do. It's allowed as far as the standards are concerned though. Ok. > /var/lib/ingres/files/ucharmaps is an odd one. The files in there won't change > but we all custom coercions to be defined and they would be put in this > directory. There's no easy way to define an alternate location for these files > so they need to be in a writable location. So they are like Apache's icons (/var/www/icons/): you can keep them if you want to, but if don't want them, you can change them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651227] Review Request: python-sleekxmpp - Flexible XMPP client/component/server library for Python >= 2.6
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651227 --- Comment #4 from Florent Le Coz 2010-11-09 18:52:32 EST --- Spec URL: http://louizatakk.fedorapeople.org/rpm/python-sleekxmpp.spec SRPM URL: http://louizatakk.fedorapeople.org/rpm/python-sleekxmpp-1.0-0.3.beta2.fc13.src.rpm I fixed that, accordingly with the documentation you pointed. And I also added the execution of tests in %check -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648267] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity - Make tamper-resistant links in CGI::Application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648267 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648266] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON - Easy manipulation of JSON headers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648266 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 19:46:02 EST --- perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON-1.02-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON-1.02-2.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648267] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity - Make tamper-resistant links in CGI::Application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648267 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 19:47:03 EST --- perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity-0.06-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity-0.06-2.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648266] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON - Easy manipulation of JSON headers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648266 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648266] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON - Easy manipulation of JSON headers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648266 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 19:46:09 EST --- perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON-1.02-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-JSON-1.02-2.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648267] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity - Make tamper-resistant links in CGI::Application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648267 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2010-11-09 19:47:09 EST --- perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity-0.06-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-CGI-Application-Plugin-LinkIntegrity-0.06-2.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
